The independent newspaper of Washington University in St. Louis since 1878 THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 2021
VOLUME 142, NO. 17
TAKE THE WU IN F
O
WWW.STUDLIFE.COM
CUS SURVEY
SU passes general budget of $3.9 million
The 2021 SU budget:
SU allocates $3.9 million of $4.5 million total requested funds across student groups, campus entities
ORLI SHEFFEY AND TED MOSKAL NEWS EDITORS
TOTAL SU BUDGET ALLOCATION, 2017 - 2021 $4 million
$3.9 million
$3.8 million $3.6 million
$3.75 million $3.5 million $3.3 million
$3.2 million
$3.3 million
$3 million 2017
2018
2019
2020
2021 GRAPHIC BY MIA GOLDBERG
TED MOSKAL SENIOR NEWS EDITOR Student Union unanimously passed a $3.9 million general budget, using a new streamlined process for the second year in a row. SU’s general budget is funded by the student activities fee, which is equal to 1% of the cost of undergraduate tuition. Under the new system, the details of the general budget proposal are hashed out in smaller section meetings composed of both SU Senate and Treasury representatives. Based on these discussions, Vice President of Finance senior Alexa Jochims constructed a budget proposal that approved $3,906,433.23 of the $4,525,244.14 in requested funds. A joint session of the Treasury and Senate took place over Zoom, Feb. 27, to debate and approve some version of this proposal. The largest section in the budget was $1.9 million dedicated to funding student group reserves, an increase from $1.6 million last year. Nearly all student groups on campus receive their funding through this process. A proposal to reduce the budget for student group reserves was raised but quickly dismissed, as many argued that this section of
the budget should not be used as a reserve fund for other initiatives. “In terms of really advocating for the student body from a Treasury perspective, moving from Carly Rae Jepsen to T-Pain is just simply not as important to allowing students to do what they really want to do on campus and actually have their events,” Activities Committee Chair junior Zoe Hancock said. The final budget also allocated $1,020,630 to the Social Programming Board, which is responsible for hosting a variety of events open to the entire student body, the most popular of which are the biannual WILD concerts. Jochims’ initial proposal allocated $125,000 for fall WILD and $100,000 for spring WILD, but Student Union ended up voting 18-17 in favor of adding an additional $10,000 to the budget of spring WILD. “It's been made very clear that this is not enough money to run a suitable WILD,” treasury representative junior Joel Brody said. “The 125 [thousand] for big WILD is fine, but 100 grand for the small one is not going to get us there.” However, Hancock expressed reservations about allocating an additional $10,000 without a clear understanding of how it would
affect the quality of the WILD artist. “Any increase that we do is going to be kind of arbitrary, because we don't have an ability to see which artists we would like to choose between,” she said. “I would also really consider that an increase of $10,000 in WILD talent seems like a small number compared to the rest of it. But $10,000 anywhere else in our budget is a massive, massive chunk.” Before the COVID-19 pandemic, SPB had considered adjusting the annual WILD budget to plan one larger concert and one smaller concert, but this was postponed due to COVID-19. “Previously, we put out a student body vote, and the student body wanted to do a bigger WILD and a smaller WILD,” Vice President of Programming senior Charlotte Pohl said. “But then because of COVID and missing three semesters worth of WILD, we thought it would be better to go back to the medium sized ones and then that can be re-addressed at the end of next year.” One other significant change from previous years was that student groups were unable to petition for block funding, a complex process that requires groups to gather signatures from 15% of
WU reports 117 student COVID-19 violations amid new clusters
the student body in order to be guaranteed full funding. Student groups such as Emergency Support Team (EST), Uncle Joe’s Peer Counseling, the Campus Y and Habitat for Humanity had all petitioned for block funding in previous years, but either failed to gather enough signatures or opted to forgo the process in anticipation of lower engagement related to the pandemic. “EST and Uncle Joe's both said that they wanted to become line items, which is why we saw them in a different spot today,” Jochims said. “Habitat for Humanity a couple days ago said that they would rather just go through the student group budget submission process, instead of using block funding and they pulled out pretty quickly. Then Campus Y and Datamatch ultimately didn't receive enough signatures to go on the March ballot, which is why they also shifted over to student group funding.” Because of the important role that these groups play on campus, SU elected to write them into the budget as line items. However, EST received $49,476.39 of its requested $51,742.39 in funding, while Uncle Joe’s received just $5,625 of its requested $9,105.
SEE SU, PAGE 2
Since the start of the spring semester, three large clusters of COVID-19 cases have been reported by Washington University, and the Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards has adjudicated at least 117 student conduct cases related to COVID-19 violations. According to Sheryl Mauricio, associate dean of the Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards, her office has adjudicated a total of 649 COVID-19 violations during the 2020-2021 academic year, 117 of which have occurred this semester. These violations range in severity from lack of mask wearing to hosting an unsafe social event. Although no students to date have been suspended or expelled for COVID-19 violations, Mauricio said that “several cases have been referred to the Student Conduct Board for suspension regarding egregious allegations of violation of Wash. U.’s COVID-19 Health and Safety Guidelines.” This comes at a time when COVID-19 cases are rising on campus, with the University reporting three large clusters on the Danforth Campus COVID-19 Dashboard. According to Rob Wild, interim vice chancellor for student affairs, the first cluster from Jan. 28 involved a group of graduate students gathering for dinner. After one attendee reported symptoms the following Monday, a total of 12 students from the gathering tested positive and 29 other students were required to quarantine. The second cluster, which occured from Feb. 4 to Feb. 6., involved five separate off-campus gatherings with many of the same undergraduate students gathering in groups of 10 to 15. As a result, 19 students tested positive and 58 other students were required to quarantine.
SEE COVID-19, PAGE 2
Following decline in use, WU opts to take down South 40 study tent OLIVIA DANNER STAFF REPORTER The South 40 tent, designed to provide students a sheltered, well-ventilated work and dining space, has been taken down after being deemed unnecessary by administrators. According to Kawanna Leggett, interim associate vice chancellor and dean of students, the tent did not receive a high level of use. “When the tent was put up, we were still uncertain of what student needs would be for the fall semester,” Legget wrote in a statement to Student Life. “As we are anticipating warmer weather, we feel the location can be better utilized as an
outdoor gathering space.” According to Leggett, the tent’s materials will either be repurposed or returned. “The material is not being discarded,” Leggett wrote. “The workstations will be resold or donated to local organizations. Most of the HVAC equipment was rented and the lighting will be reused by the University.” She added that information about the total cost of the tent is “not available.” Shreya Patel, a freshman who used the tent, agrees that the tent was unnecessary, citing a lack of use. “When BD was closed, I used to go there to eat my dinner
sometimes, but I never saw a single other person in the tent. Ever,” Patel said. However, Patel was still able to utilize the tent for unconventional purposes. “I did go and scream in the tent a few times. I'm stressed and go in there and just let loose a little bit,” Patel said. Freshman Justin Zhang also failed to see the tent’s utility. “It's less desirable than just being in your dorm room. First of all, it's not a lot of private space, and you're not able to socialize with anyone, so there's not really any specific point to going there,” Zhang said. He also voiced concerns that the
tent was kept in operation until now. “It still has lights on, still has air conditioning, or whatever is going on in there, so there's a lot of costs associated with just keeping it running that probably were not worth it in the long run,” Zhang said. Zhang believes the money spent on the tent could have been used for purposes that better serve students. “They probably should have consulted students before dumping money into this project, because I think the University… needs to focus its funds, its money, into areas that are definitely going to benefit students, for example the Mental Health Fund,” Zhang said. Patel reinforced Zhang’s concern
CONTACT BY POST
CONTACT BY EMAIL
CONTACT BY PHONE
ONE BROOKINGS DRIVE #1039 #320 DANFORTH UNIVERSITY CENTER ST. LOUIS, MO 63130-4899
EDITOR@STUDLIFE.COM NEWS@STUDLIFE.COM CALENDAR@STUDLIFE.COM
NEWSROOM 314.935.5995 ADVERTISING 314.935.4240 FAX 314.935.5938
about funding, adding that students need extra resources amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. “I think they could have put that money into better things that would have been more useful as students dealt with COVID,” Patel said. Freshman Noah Vermes also attributes the tent’s inutility to a lack of communication between administration and students. “I think that there's just a general disconnect between what the administration sees as the issues that students here face and between the actual issues that students face,” Vermes said. “It’s frankly disheartening to see all that money go towards something that wasn’t very used.”